Elizabeth Gotsdiner, 24
Home Town:
Iowa City, IA

Occupation:
Student
The introduction to politics in this past year has not only changed me, it has inspired and motivated me to do my part in a democratic society. I now know that as a citizen of this great country I ha ... See full Bio

McPalin vs. OBiden
Remember today
Non Partisan President
Hot Topic
Postponed Presidency
Biden barked at me.
Paulson-Palin Bailout
Sir Samuel Wurzelbacher
John Kerry
CONVINCE ME!!!
John Kerry
October 19th - 3:12 pm

Senator Kerry Spoke in Manchester, NH this past weekend, and his supporters were vibrant and excited, holding up signs reading "Hocky Mom's For Obama".  It turned into a beautiful day, and hearing politicians talk crap about their opposition is always better in the sunshine.  Kerry's speech began with negative rhetoric directed towards McCain.  And it continued.  And continued.  And continued.  I always find it funny when a politicians accusations are no better than their own actions.  He spent the entire speech highlighting how negative Senator McCain is, how all he does is attack, but Kerry got in plenty zingers of his own, but they were lame attempts at jokes, and generally mean.  (I wish I could recall some specifics). 

When he got off stage I had an opportunity to approach him and speak with him.  My main concern, which I don't know when this has turned into my main concern, is healthcare.  I'm confused.  How can we afford universal healthcare?  How can we ensure the quality of care won't decrease, and waits won't increase?  I figured I'd ask Kerry for some answers.

First, I asked him "where is the money going to come from to pay for universal healthcare?"  I should have known the answer.  I've heard it a million times, I just didn't realize that taxing people making over $250,000 was the solution to just the healthcare issue.  I thought that tax money was going to everything else on Obama's list, better schools, tax credits for students, money for alternative fuel research.... how much money is the government going to recieve from the upper class?  It sounds like as much money as its going to take to fuel these products everyone will end up in the middle class anyways.  What's the point in work?

After Kerry's response of wealth distribution, I asked whether we would see the care decrease and waits increase.  He informed me this would better the situation, becuase anyone who already had their healthcare can keep their same coverage.  But why should anyone already paying for their coverage have to pay for someone else's as well?  He said that since the healthy youth will be paying into this pool as well and won't be needing  this care, the money will go towards older people who do.

So let me get this right... universal healthcare is going to be paid for by the young and the rich.

Comments:
Bert
Here it is...
October 23rd - 7:18 am
Flandamier, you are confused, there is the amount deducted each week, and the amount paid on April 15th, when you fill out your initial paper work when starting a job, you can check the boxes for married with six kids and have almost nothing deducted. That said, when tax day comes around you must pay the entire amount that is due. Likewise if you claim single with zero dependents the withholding amount will be large but you will receive a refund after you file. I cannot believe that sharp guy like you needs this stuff explained. I learned most of this in college Economics and the workplace, with a little help from Turbo-Tax.

Elizabeth, I would like to point out that the Government already distributes my resources for it's favorite charities not only here but around the world. I would prefer the Ron Paul model if it is applied evenly over the entire population, not just to the wealthy, and believe me if you earn $250K and are not wealthy then there is a serious money management problem, remember that would support five middle income families where I live.

The highest earning people in our society also use the largest amount of resources, drive up energy prices, and require the most protection whether here or for their interests around the world. Most high earners today are earning a lot because our current system of laws creates an Environment that gives then that earning power. We think that Europe is similar us in some ways, however when I was in Germany I was surprised to learn that while doctors, lawyers, and finance professionals earned above average salaries they were not that much greater than the people who worked in the more "earth-bound" professions, and that the entrepreneurs who created jobs for many at risk of their personal fortune were in fact rewarded at a higher rate.

If the highest paid lawyer in this nation were put into another society, where the laws did not favor his profession (almost anywhere but the USA), they would not earn anywhere near what they do here. This same scenario would apply to a stockbroker or banker. This is an artificial environment that favors certain people, the ones who benefit the most from this environment should pay the most to maintain it.

The system of "Free Trade" and "Global Economy" must apply in ALL areas of our economy, not just the ones that don't have the protection supplied by powerful Professional Groups lobbying our lawmakers.

When I buy a house I want an Indian Lawyer to draw up the deed for $5.00 over the internet.

I want Mexican Lawyers who cross the border to live here, to be Given the Bar exam in Spanish and awarded their License to practice law. This would help bring down the legal fees in this country and help ease the burden on the courts that cause such long waits for decisions. "Free Trade" is Good for us all right?
Elizabeth
October 23rd - 12:03 am
CARL: Maybe it's funny to you, but it's not funny to me :) School is entirely too expensive here. I wouldn't mind Obama's $4000 tax credit. It's funny, after I asked John Kerry about McCain's $5000 health care tax credit he responded "It's a credit, it's not even money". I wish I would have been quick enough to throw that one back in his face.

You made an excellent point that I have thought around, and haven't been explicit about. "I don't think it would work for you in the setting you have right now". I agree. Many discussions I've had lately I've heard "It works for Canada". We aren't Canada. We got issues.

I have some Swedish man friends, maybe I should call them up and take an 18 month break!

BERT: I won't disagree that $250K is a healthy sum of money, but it's also an earned amount. It seems to me, however, that you are contradicting yourself in asserting that position, becuase it doesn't matter how much money you make, you should be the one to choose where to distribute it, right? That's Ron Paulite-ish.
What has troubled me, and help me here, is where is personal success marked as too successful? When do you reach a point where it's OK for the government to step in and say, "alright, we'll take it from here!"

Would it be insane to instead of tax a certain amount, to make it mandatory to donate to a charity, or a cause? Sure, allow the government the right to create a list and then "the rich" can select at their own will? Just a suggestion.
 
Flandamier
Bert
October 22nd - 11:07 pm
Ok Bert, let me tell you from my point of view. I used to work a $5.00 an hour job back in the early 90's. It was slightly above minumum back then. I used to work from 5am to 7PM every day M-F. This means that by noon Wednesday I was already into overtime, which they didn't mind paying. Matter of fact to help us out they split our paychecks up. One regular 40 hour paycheck and one was my OT paycheck. When I asked why this was, it was because my paycheck would get more deducted if it was one because of the higher tax bracket.

Now I am not an economist nor am I a tax expert. Obviously Bert, you have gone to the school of H & R Block and know more than the rest of us here, but my paychecks don't lie.
Bert
$250K....middle class?
October 22nd - 8:17 pm
I'm sorry Elizabeth, with the average US family income at $70,700 (and falling!) and just under $48 K in the town where I live, $250 K is just an undreamed of amount for most US families, and would likely make you one of the wealthiest families for many miles around here.
 
Carl
yikes
October 22nd - 8:02 pm
I would get a nervous breakdown if I would be forced having a debate about this with Bert. This guy is sharp and has done his homework well. :)

I come from a country where we have free health care for all. The dentist, the emergency hall etc etc - all is free. The thought is not that the young and the rich are going to pay for it, but that everyone pays for it equally and it is a benefit for everyone. It is a cradle to the grave system where you basically live your whole life in a state institution. It works for us, but nothing lasts forever. We have been, as I told before, a very closed country and it is this context the welfare state works best because it is all about who gets what benefits and these are almost always decided on citizenship (or they are) and citizenship is almost always depending on race, language, culture etc.
I don't think it would work for you in the setting you have right now.

It is just funny meanwhile you pay for your studies I get paid from studying *lol*. I fix my teeth for free and we have a state supported retirement. If you would get a child with a Swede Elizabeth you could stay home for 18 months with full payment with the baby.

I decided not to put much effort in explaining my own opinions here, more like explaining how things are over here.

tegis.wordpress.com
Bert
Flandamier
October 22nd - 4:33 pm
for all your schooling you don't know poop!


Do your own taxes for a change, if he works OT only the portion of his income over $30,650 Adjusted Gross income is taxed at 25%, when he takes the standard deduction,none of his income will be taxed at a higher rate at all, it will all be taxed at 15%.

At $15/HR he will have to work a whole lot of OT to get his "Gross Adjusted Income" over $30,650, after he deducts, state and local taxes, tax prep fees (since he obviously doesn't do his own) and mortgage interest (if he has one) as well as any other deductions.

If you make a million a year, the first $7,500 (if you are single) is still only taxed at 10%, the next $7,500-$30,650 is taxed at 15%

and so on up to $336,500 at which time the rest is taxed at 35%, but by that time you are wealthy enough to qualify for myriad loop holes and shelters, designed by and for people just like you.

Do your homework and don't just repeat some other guy's baloney.
 
Flandamier
October 22nd - 3:08 am
Bert - I guess I should define "good money". I mean he was making $15.00 per hour which puts him in the 15% bracket. If he works the OT his entire paycheck is charged the 25% bracket rate and thats just Federal, not to mention state and local taxes.

Instead of penalizing for working harder, why not just eliminate the income tax? Why not have the "Fair Tax" which is a national sales tax on new items? Or how about a "Flat Tax" that charges everyone the same tax no matter what you make?

To me these seem to be better options then having over 600,000 pages of IRS rules and regulations that nobody understands. To me, these brackets do nothing but create more headaches and controversy and most of all create the environment for class warfare.

Elizabeth
October 22nd - 1:06 am
ELEANOR: Dear Miss Rigby, I totally agree with you. I think one of my big concerns is my perception of "rich". I don't think $250K is enough to tax with the big boys. This is still a working class to me. Upper middle yes, but still working.

You bring up a fabulous point... don't we have county hospitals? Isn't that where people go who don't have healthcare? And still recieve care? So why should we turn every hospital into a county hospital?
 
eleanor R
October 21st - 8:51 pm
PS...Healthcare is a privelege not a right. Yet the perfect solution hasn't been identified to date. To make health insurance an entitlement like O wants is a slippery slope. Under McCains plan you participate in providing your own insurance, thereby having a vested interest. What is wrong with that? I'm in the health care business, and have yet to see a person that really needs care not get it. I'm not saying there isn't a need for reconstruction here, but I am not really interested in paying for a slackers healthcare. I am not talking about the truly needy, just those that think I should pay their way.
 
eleanor R
October 21st - 8:41 pm
It is easy for the VERY rich like John Kerry to spend other peoples money. Overtaxing an income of $250,000 would hurt. Maybe $500,000 would be more of a good cut off. Everybody spends a little more than they earn no matter what it is! Also, I can't believe all of Obama's promises....can't he hear himself. It's almost comical only it turns out to be more of a tragedy because people really believe him...not understanding that Presidents only have veto power. Still, he borders on ridiculous. Just because he says it, doesn't make it so.
Bert
It's not worth working the OT?
October 21st - 7:47 pm
Fland, not so fast

I worked hourly when I was younger and there was always somebody saying (bigwheel types) that they would make less if they worked more.

They were full of baloney, it is still true today, if your friend is making $37.00 an hour and he does overtime, then he pays %3 more on only the overtime.

doesn't sound that tough to me.

The people who make the most in this country are the ones who are benefiting the most from the economic/ business climate the way it happens to be (the way that it pays to be).

The ones who are on the good end of all the legislated inequity.

They should pay the most for being in the most favorable position.

Why should people who have their jobs off-shored and make very little, pay as much as the ones who get the huge windfall garnered by the exploitation of abused labor and lax environmental standards off-shore?

Currently the cost of moving production off-shore is TAX DEDUCTIBLE , a simple business expense.

Wealth is legislated in this country, that is why the big cash is flowing hard into the pockets of the few.

Right out of the pockets of the masses.

If you think we have "free markets" and "unfettered capitalism" you been smokin' too much of that stuff that the "free traders" dish up.
Bert
Remember, ther are loopholes for every occasion, at the upper end
October 21st - 7:32 pm
Tax Brackets—2006 Taxable Income

Joint return Single taxpayer Rate
$0–$15,100 $0–$7,500 10.0%
15,100–61,300 7,500–30,650 15.0
61,300–123,700 30,650 –74,200 25.0
123,700 –188,450 74,200–154,800 28.0
188,450–336,550 154,800–336,500 33.0
336,550 and up 336,500 and up 35.0

Source: Internal Revenue Service. Web: www.irs.gov.
Elizabeth
October 21st - 11:47 am
FLAND: I agree with you. That has been a difining idea for my lean towards the middle, maybe even the right, over the left. I am not comfortable with taxing people who earned their way.

The whole issue with the $250 K and up... I still don't see it being fair. I'm not sure what the current policy is, but I don't think they deserve tax breaks, but definitely not tax increases. This is a income bracket that pays for everything, and recieves nothing. I see nothing wrong with not charging them the nations health care.
 
Flandamier
Answer me this...
October 21st - 4:43 am
Why is it fair that the more money you make the higher the percentage of tax is?

I know a guy who makes a good money working 40 hours a week. He get's paid time and a half if he works OT. He would love to work it, but if he does, then he is put into a higher tax bracket, which makes it not worth working the OT.

So what is the incentive to work more or even harder?
Elizabeth
October 20th - 9:23 am
Also, for people makeing $250K, they will be the one's hurting from the taxes. If I'm not mistaken, they fit into the tax bracket to recieve zero aid. So when they have to put their four kids through school, they recieve no government aid. They sit right at area of paying for everything, and everyone else. At the end of the day, these folks will be making equal to those who recieved everything from the government, except they earned it themselves. I think it should be half million and higher if anything. This number is really not that big. It sounds it, but after a house, most likely two cars and college, its not.
Tanya
Kerry
October 20th - 9:13 am
You got it Lizz! And Kerry and Obama and all of their cronies think this is ok. And you know what? I've spoken to a lot of people who say it's fine with them because they don't make $250k a year. But when those people who do make that kind of money begin to get taxed to death, they will take their business elsewhere or wil begin to lay people off. Then the people who relied on them for jobs will be crying the blues, wondering where their sugar daddies went.